Banning masks means banning (a subset) of disabled people from public places without great risk to their health
Banning masks means banning (a subset) of disabled people from public places without great risk to their health
You're viewing a single thread.
what about schizo people like me who wish to hide their identity so as to not be clobbered by AI facial recognition software?
Remember that you're not crazy for or alone in wanting that privacy. If I saw you shooting them out with a pellet gun then no, I didn't.
i mean, yes you did, i would give you a pellet gun as well. It's just that we wouldn't talk about it outside of telepathy.
My sister said she loved not being told by random creepy dudes at the grocery store that she'd be prettier if she smiled more.
i think most people prefer not being told to be happier.
It's like reverse psychology.
They need something like Invisalign, but they make your teeth appear to be in terrible condition. So, when says that you can smile and scare the shit out of them.
That's called "American Healthcare" since it doesn't include teeth.
the irony here being, that americans have impossibly good teeth, compared to other european nations...
It’s schizo to think this?! Being constantly surveilled is unreasonable search and seizure.
is it schizo? Objectively? No not really. As far as popular culture, am i schizo for not wanting to reveal my identity to anybody? Probably a little bit.
I would argue it may be a violation of unreasonable search, but definitely a violation of our right to privacy (that we should have).
Ah thanks for clarifying I was like wait I’m schizo?
I’d say the right to privacy would be covered under the right to not be searched without a warrant.
The facial recognition on every corner is an unreasonable search IMO and society has just accepted it? Morons with well I’ve got nothing to hide…
Ah thanks for clarifying I was like wait I’m schizo?
np, and just between the two of us, yeah you are :)
I’d say the right to privacy would be covered under the right to not be searched without a warrant.
it depends on the specifics i think, but from what i can understand the primary legal argument against it right now is actually "unreasonable search and seizure" and "illegal evidence collection" rather than, warrant specific things, though im sure that's sort of adjacent.
The problem right now is that none of our laws explicitly protect things like forcing people to use face ID in order to unlock their phone, because it isn't technically "extracting" information from someone unwillingly. Similar issues with collecting evidence from the trash, or using AI facial recognition. There just aren't any clear laws, and the police are taking advantage of it while they can.
The facial recognition on every corner is an unreasonable search IMO and society has just accepted it? Morons with well I’ve got nothing to hide…
i think for facial recognition, i would argue it's a violation of right to privacy, rather than unreasonable search and seizure, because they aren't searching for anything, or seizing anything, necessarily. I think i would rather have stronger privacy laws after the fact anyway.
Also, facial recognition is mostly a problem with using cameras in public, rather than police using cameras in public, putting this under unreasonable search and seizure limits it to police activity explicitly, i would much rather not be facially recognized at all, when outside. Private entity, or not.
There is no right to privacy which is why I think it should fall under the right against unreasonable search and seizure. They’re using your face and searching it against a database for no reason other than treating everybody like they’re a criminal to comfort rich peoples fee fees.
You're one of the reasons for the ban.
No kidding. While on the surface the bans are about medical masks, I'm sure there's a surveillance motive as well.
NYC has an explicit ban on masks that conceal identities, as of a while ago now, unless that's been repealed somehow.
It's an idea, for sure.
I genuinely, seriously doubt it. I imagine its to keep MAGAts happy while completely fucking them over socio-economically.
It's also so they can target people with facial recognition.
unfortunately, yes, fortunately for me, and other people, i'm still correct in this regard.
There's nothing inherently wrong with wanting to obscure your identity, if there was the internet wouldn't allow anonymity. People would be required to wear their government issued ID on their shirts. Etc.